对比增强超声(CEUS)作为肾肿瘤病灶治疗后的随访方法:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY International Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-08 DOI:10.1007/s11255-024-04102-9
Stanislav Vovdenko, Stanislav Ali, Hussein Ali, Mark Taratkin, Andrey Morozov, Aleksandr Suvorov, Diana Khabib, Leonid Rapoport, Evgeny Bezrukov
{"title":"对比增强超声(CEUS)作为肾肿瘤病灶治疗后的随访方法:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Stanislav Vovdenko, Stanislav Ali, Hussein Ali, Mark Taratkin, Andrey Morozov, Aleksandr Suvorov, Diana Khabib, Leonid Rapoport, Evgeny Bezrukov","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04102-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a cost-effective radiation-free diagnostic method that can be used for renal tumor postoperative visualization after ablative treatment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess CEUS diagnostic accuracy comparing with CT and MRI as a follow-up method in short-term and long-term postoperative periods after renal tumor ablation.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in Scopus and Medline databases using the query \"(kidney OR rena* OR RCC) AND (ablation OR RFA OR MWA OR cryo*) AND CEUS\". The endpoint of the study was the evaluation of the overall accuracy of CEUS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve trials were included in the review. With CT or MRI as a reference, for a short-term group (< 6 weeks after ablation) pooled sensitivity was 90.2%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled specificity was 99.3%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled NPV was 98.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled PPV was 94.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; the AUC on the SROC curve was 0.971. For the long-term group (> 6 weeks after ablation), pooled sensitivity was 95.3%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled specificity was 97.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; PPV was 74.2%, I<sup>2</sup> = 4%; NPV was 99.4%, I<sup>2</sup> = 5%; AUC = 0.93.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CEUS has high sensitivity and specificity in ruling out the presence of local recurrence after renal tumor ablation with a higher risk of false-positive results within follow-up > 6 weeks compared with that for CT or MRI. Further studies with a unified protocol and morphological control of local renal tumor recurrence after ablation are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"3415-3426"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as a follow-up method after the focal treatment of renal tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Stanislav Vovdenko, Stanislav Ali, Hussein Ali, Mark Taratkin, Andrey Morozov, Aleksandr Suvorov, Diana Khabib, Leonid Rapoport, Evgeny Bezrukov\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11255-024-04102-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a cost-effective radiation-free diagnostic method that can be used for renal tumor postoperative visualization after ablative treatment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess CEUS diagnostic accuracy comparing with CT and MRI as a follow-up method in short-term and long-term postoperative periods after renal tumor ablation.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in Scopus and Medline databases using the query \\\"(kidney OR rena* OR RCC) AND (ablation OR RFA OR MWA OR cryo*) AND CEUS\\\". The endpoint of the study was the evaluation of the overall accuracy of CEUS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve trials were included in the review. With CT or MRI as a reference, for a short-term group (< 6 weeks after ablation) pooled sensitivity was 90.2%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled specificity was 99.3%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled NPV was 98.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled PPV was 94.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; the AUC on the SROC curve was 0.971. For the long-term group (> 6 weeks after ablation), pooled sensitivity was 95.3%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; pooled specificity was 97.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; PPV was 74.2%, I<sup>2</sup> = 4%; NPV was 99.4%, I<sup>2</sup> = 5%; AUC = 0.93.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CEUS has high sensitivity and specificity in ruling out the presence of local recurrence after renal tumor ablation with a higher risk of false-positive results within follow-up > 6 weeks compared with that for CT or MRI. Further studies with a unified protocol and morphological control of local renal tumor recurrence after ablation are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"3415-3426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04102-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04102-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对比增强超声(CEUS)是一种经济有效的无辐射诊断方法,可用于肾肿瘤消融治疗后的术后观察:评估 CEUS 作为肾肿瘤消融术后短期和长期随访方法与 CT 和 MRI 相比的诊断准确性:在 Scopus 和 Medline 数据库中以"(肾脏或肾*或 RCC)和(消融或 RFA 或 MWA 或冷冻*)和 CEUS "为查询条件进行了系统综述和荟萃分析。研究的终点是评估 CEUS 的总体准确性:结果:12 项试验被纳入审查范围。以 CT 或 MRI 为参照,短期组(2 = 0%;汇总特异性为 99.3%,I2 = 0%;汇总 NPV 为 98.6%,I2 = 0%;汇总 PPV 为 94.6%,I2 = 0%;SROC 曲线的 AUC 为 0.971。对于长期组(消融后 6 周以上),汇总敏感性为 95.3%,I2 = 0%;汇总特异性为 97.6%,I2 = 0%;PPV 为 74.2%,I2 = 4%;NPV 为 99.4%,I2 = 5%;AUC = 0.93:与 CT 或 MRI 相比,CEUS 在排除肾肿瘤消融术后局部复发方面具有较高的灵敏度和特异性,但在随访 6 周内出现假阳性结果的风险较高。有必要进一步研究消融术后肾肿瘤局部复发的统一方案和形态学控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as a follow-up method after the focal treatment of renal tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Context: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a cost-effective radiation-free diagnostic method that can be used for renal tumor postoperative visualization after ablative treatment.

Objective: To assess CEUS diagnostic accuracy comparing with CT and MRI as a follow-up method in short-term and long-term postoperative periods after renal tumor ablation.

Materials and methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in Scopus and Medline databases using the query "(kidney OR rena* OR RCC) AND (ablation OR RFA OR MWA OR cryo*) AND CEUS". The endpoint of the study was the evaluation of the overall accuracy of CEUS.

Results: Twelve trials were included in the review. With CT or MRI as a reference, for a short-term group (< 6 weeks after ablation) pooled sensitivity was 90.2%, I2 = 0%; pooled specificity was 99.3%, I2 = 0%; pooled NPV was 98.6%, I2 = 0%; pooled PPV was 94.6%, I2 = 0%; the AUC on the SROC curve was 0.971. For the long-term group (> 6 weeks after ablation), pooled sensitivity was 95.3%, I2 = 0%; pooled specificity was 97.6%, I2 = 0%; PPV was 74.2%, I2 = 4%; NPV was 99.4%, I2 = 5%; AUC = 0.93.

Conclusion: CEUS has high sensitivity and specificity in ruling out the presence of local recurrence after renal tumor ablation with a higher risk of false-positive results within follow-up > 6 weeks compared with that for CT or MRI. Further studies with a unified protocol and morphological control of local renal tumor recurrence after ablation are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Clinical insights on "Effect of large language model on diagnostic accuracy and clinical completeness among nephrology fellows managing transplant infection". Kidney transplant outcomes in patients aged ≥ 70 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of multicenter or registry-based studies with future directions and a multicenter study proposal. Ferroptosis and interstitial cystitis: a systematic review of preclinical evidence and molecular mechanisms. Oncologic outcomes and prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion in renal cell carcinoma according to nodal stage. Exploratory research on efficacy and safety of a fine-needle tibial nerve stimulator for treating overactive bladder in cats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1